Hi Robin,
Could you provide some guidance on how to read the report and/or a quantitative summary of its findings? I am having a hard time determining from the raw data which aspects of the HTML specification are not paving the cow paths.
For example, for an entry like this (quoted with its original styling):
> /Projects/html/scratch/dataset/html/index-1115.html
>
> Text size: navigation arrow increase decrease | print page
> Text size: increase navigation arrow decrease | print page
What is this telling me about what happened in the markup, and what conclusion should I draw from this?
Regards,
Maciej
On Nov 23, 2012, at 7:47 AM, Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> as indicated in the CfC caveat for the publication of the HTML CR, in the discussion of the AltTech specification with its objection, and, you know, ISSUE-31, there is some amount of disagreement about the advice to be given about our poor old alt attribute.
>
> In order to get a feel for how it was actually used in the wild, I quickly generated a usage report to see if we could make some useful inferences. I don't claim that it's a solution, or that it is decisive data, but it might help.
>
> You can read more at: http://htmlwg.org/alt-usage/.
>
> From looking at the inline variant of the report, my sense is that the HTML specification as currently drafted is not paving the cow paths.
>
> Thoughts, suggestions for improvements, welcome.
>
> --
> Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
>